Subject: Re: Science, Knowledge, Understanding, Art and Wonder and Identity
From: Kevin Austin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Sep 11 2005 - 10:58:21 EDT
Perhaps it might be necessary to examine relationships and processes
rather than 'objects'. Does the brain work with / set up / create
A few examples to ponder ...
Does a "pattern" exist as an object?
Does an "outline" exist as an object?
Does a "relationship" exist as an object?
Does "repetition" exist as an object?
Do these things require the creation of "identity" (segmentation of
the information stream)?
Is information quantized and then processed? (Take for example a soundwave.)
What are the implications of dealing primarily with relationships and
At 03:39 -0700 2005/09/11, Kenneth Newby wrote:
>Along the same lines as Dawkins... I read somewhere that our
>knowledge, gained through rational exploration (science?), can be
>likened to a continent, bounded by what we do not know... the more
>we add to our knowledge the greater the continent grows and the
>greater the expanse of those boundaries between what we know and
>what we don't. Unless it's possible to finish the project of
>scientific explication of the "mysteries" of the world we inhabit
>(didn't Godel dispatch with that one?), we're doomed, or perhaps
>blessed, with a precious and perhaps growing amount of unknown
>"stuff" at its boundaries.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b27 : Sat Dec 22 2007 - 01:46:10 EST